MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167778602 · doi:10.21428/594757db.ec72e2f4

Patient representation learning from EHR data

2021· article· en· W3167778602 on OpenAlexafffund
Guillaume Desmarais-de Grandpré

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMachine Learning in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut National de Santé Publique du Québec
KeywordsPolypharmacyHealth recordsElectronic health recordRepresentation (politics)Data scienceComputer scienceDisciplineMedicinePsychologyHealth carePharmacologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research is part of a multi-disciplinary project that aims to define polypharmacy usage (the use of a combination of drugs) as well as detect and predict dangerous cases. The particular goal of the research presented herein is to learn patient representations from a massive number of Electronic Health Records (EHR) with the intent to discover sociodemographic biases in the outcomes of polypharmacy usage.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.084
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMachine Learning in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207